Quote:
Originally Posted by Valoril
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Anecdotal accounts when carefully repeated and registered stop being anecdotal and begin to be a statistical sampling [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Of course I am sure the CSR have the right numbers and draw conclusions from them. I am reasonably sure that my estimate of 5% for the Tier 1 Guilds is not so far off.
As for alts, I have obviously thought about it too.
A reasonable assumption is that if you have 5 60, then the vast majority you mentionned has already 8 (most PL) what makes starting a 9th largely irrelevant both for the player, for the guild and for the contribution to total hours played what is the main parameter I consider here. |
Well, the plural of anecdote is not data, and that would not be accepted as any form of social science. Qualitative methodology has some very strict rules of organization to how you collect and quantify your data.
However, that said, I don't think you're anywhere close to being off. You proposed a theory, and you offered the best possible way for us (as people outside of the inner system) to measure it. It may not be the best, but it is the only way we can get a snippet.
The best would be to have the inside information on which to rigorously test your theory here.
So, I don't find an issue with you bringing up your idea, just with the idea that anecdotal evidence, when carefully repeated and registered, becomes sampled data. It really doesn't come close to being considered data until you apply a framework of thought to how to interpret the empirical observations, and translate that into working data, rather than saying "This is what it looked like, so data!" Getting your framework out of your observations is sort of counter-intuitive to that, and reeks of bias.
Plus, the /who system and assumptions introduce a ton of bias.